On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 03:14:55PM +0800, Wan Tat Chee wrote:
> Hmm. I don't know if standardizing the package naming convention across
> distros is a worthwhile goal to shoot for, but currently I won't be able
> to generate 'freevo-media' for the src-only distribution (it defaults to
> freevo-src-media for subpackages).
I didn't mean that you had to name it the same way; it's just
convenient to break up the big data files from the code.
> > A full binary would ideally go into /usr/lib/python2.X/site-packages,
> > but it can be placed into /usr/local/ if you want. Either case will
> > work thanks to Dischi :)
>
> Do you mean that it'd be
> /usr/lib/python2.X/site-packages/freevo/{runtime, src, skins, ...}
>
> I feel that's more confusing than putting it under
> /usr/local/freevo. (Either we follow the standard properly like for
> freevo-src, or else we should stick to /usr/local/freevo)
Freevo becomes a Python library so the code goes there, the data goes
into /usr/share/freevo as per the LSB standard.
Aubin
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Freevo-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freevo-devel
